Liberal or Conservative?

by 22 Replies latest social current

  • StAnn

    Sorry Ann, a conservative with libertarian leanings is the kind of person who would step on some one's fingers while they were trying to climb up out of a hole. At the same time bowing down to huge champagne swilling megalithic corporations and saying "why are you being so mean as to tax them?? "

    No, Beks, I'm a bleeding heart conservative with libertarian leanings. That means, if someone is trying to climb up out of a hole, I tell them to put down their cell phone and not call 911. No need to waste tax dollars on 911 emergency services when the whole neighborhood could help out. I gather the neighbors together and we go through our sheds to gather ladders and ropes. We pull up the trapped person, using our combined strength, and congratulate ourselves on rescuing our neighbor without government intervention. Then when the megalithic corporations offer us champagne as a reward for being neighborly, we tell them, "no thanks" because we get our champagne (well, sparkling wine) from our local winery, Hanover Winery. We like to support our local businesses. Then we walk back to our homes, aided by insoles we purchased at Eugenio's, another local business, tend to our backyard gardens (grown organically, of course) and get on with our personal lives.

    See? It's so simple, really.

  • beksbks

    LOL yes it is.

  • palmtree67


    As a devout JW, you are not to have an opinion on worldly politics, as I'm sure you're aware.

  • Farkel

    :CONSERVATIVES - believe in personal responsibility, limited government, free markets, individual liberty, traditional American values and a strong national defense. Believe the role of government should be to provide people the freedom necessary to pursue their own goals.

    :Conservative policies generally emphasize empowerment of the individual to solve problems.

    :LIBERALS - believe in governmental action to achieve equal opportunity and equality for all, and that it is the duty of the State to alleviate social ills and to protect civil liberties and individual and human rights. Believe the role of the government should be to guarantee that no one is in need. Believe that people are basically good.

    :Liberal policies generally emphasize the need for the government to solve people's problems.

    Those descriptions are fairly accurate.

    Any person with half-a-brain can see that the "C's" believe in the individual more than the Government, and the "L's" believe in the Government more than the individual. Our Country was founded on the notion that the individual is much more important than the Government, and that is why they severely limited the powers of the Government.

    The "L's" obviously think our Founding Fathers were full of shit. I DARE the "L's" to defeat that assertion. I DARE you. You'd better be prepared, because I am.

    Despite the fact that some individuals and particularly Corporations abuse that Freedom, it is clear from those clear definitions given above, our Founding Fathers were loathe to be "L's."

    I see the Government as an entity that gives us the Liberty to solve our own problems, and only intervenes when human greed and tyranny gets in the way of our Liberties. I do NOT see the Government as our Nanny, who micro-manages our lives and "gives us a bunch of stuff" from money stolen from other people as payment for "helping us out."

    "Any Government that can do things FOR you, can do things TO you." The more one lets government do the former, the more they will do the latter. That is one of the reasons we live in a near-Police State today in the USA. The US Government is like the WTS GB: "cede your Liberties to us, and we will make it worth your while." Bullocks to that, I say. Fuck them. (Pardon the "French", they used to say. "They" who said that assumed French people used the "F" word inappropriately, I guess. However, I never heard a French person use the "F" word, so I guess "they" don't know that much, after all.)


    :Sorry Ann, a conservative with libertarian leanings is the kind of person who would step on some one's fingers while they were trying to climb up out of a hole.

    Give an example of what you are talking about, please. I can give an example of just the opposite: Joe Blow is trying to start up his little business, but he is flummoxed by a mountain of bullshit red-tape, fees, hiring requirements, affirmative action bullshit, licenses and taxes, and Government interference at all levels, so he gives up or goes belly-up and gets a job working for a Company that has mega-tax advantages given by a Government who "helped" the Corporation get out of their own hole they dug for themselves, using 200 billion dollars of stolen tax-payer money, who then pays Joe Blow ten bucks an hour and treats him like shit, because he is easily replaced by some other Joe Blow who also got the same treatment from the "Government who helps people." Meanwhile, the Company executives are giving themselves 8 figure bonuses using the bail-out money and travelling around in their Corporate jets telling their branch offices to "cut expenses" and to fire the dead-weight employees, especially those nearing retirement age who have worked there for 30 or 40 years.

    The Company I am talking about should have let nature take its course: FAIL and go BANKRUPT, sucker. You screwed up. Die. It's your fault. Don't let the Government use stolen taxpayer money to help you out, no matter how much you bribe them to do it. Die, sucker. Die.

    Talking about stepping on someone's fingers while they were trying to climb out of a hole...the Government does that better than anyone else for the little guy: you know: the kind of guy that BUILT this Country into what it was.

    :At the same time bowing down to huge champagne swilling megalithic corporations and saying "why are you being so mean as to tax them?? "

    Yeah. That's the downside, and that is a valid observation. As I said, the Supremes have been wrestling with that issue since the founding of this Republic. The solution is not letting the Government intervene in ALL of our lives to solve those problems, but letting the Government intervene in those areas where others deprive us of our Liberties, while preserving the Liberties they haven't yet stolen from us.


  • Farkel

    The silence is deafening, but I'm waiting for the bullshit responses tomorrow.

    Farkel, Patience CLASS

  • freydo

    The Flip-Flop System

    "The Two-Party System has evolved into the Flip-Flop System. The American voters in all their wisdom have modified this system in order to keep the politicians off balance, so everyone may have the opportunity to have their cake and eat it too.

    Of course, we know that you can't have your cake and eat it too; but, this being America, what with freedom of choice and all, we should all have the equal opportunity to try. Well, the politicians can play that game too, and so they have also brought about a regime change that affords them the opportunity to change the rules at any point in the game. So now we really have a fair system. It's called the Flip-Flop System. The two parties do the flip-flop whenever the voters ask for change.

    Change is good in a democracy, in the same way the Gecko character said in the movie WALL STREET, that greed is good for the stock market. Change creates opportunity for the have-nots to become the haves. And since the haves already have it, it's a win-win situation for everyone. For example, we all believe in keeping America safe against the terrorists and those people who hate us for no reason whatsoever. In one election, the Republicans win by declaring war on terror and the next election the Democrats win by declaring peace against the terrorists. As we all know from our Vietnam War experience that we can win the peace by declaring that the war has been lost.

    This is not just a matter of semantics. We've been successful in flip-flopping between winning the war and winning the peace in many arenas. We fought the alcohol industry during the prohibition, and then we repealed the law so people could sell alcohol again. When they asked Elliott Ness, in the movie version of the story, what he was going to do now that the Prohibition was over, he replied,
    "I'll go have a drink."

    Voters flip-flop all the time. In the 2004 Election, the Republicans won both Houses of Congress. In the 2006 election, the Democrats won both Houses of Congress. The Republicans chanted, "flip-flop, flip-flop," in the Republican Convention of 2004. Now, the Republicans are joining the Democrats against the War on Terror and the Democrats are joining the Republicans against Amnesty for the Mexicans who enter the US to pick fruit and vegetables so Americans can afford to feed their families.

    The Democrats are now turning Conservative and the Republicans are turning Liberal. Ted Kennedy joined John McCain to introduce the Bill for Amnesty, and to see them both defeated is ironic. Is Amnesty for the Mexican farm laborers, who enter the US illegally to work the fields, a Liberal or Conservative issue?

    Well, we know from studying statistics that the Mexican-Americans have contributed to the defense of the US more soldiers and heroes, and have won more medals in major wars than any other immigrant group in US history. This is also true with the Vietnam War and the present War on Terror. However, not many of us know that most of these heroes were and are the children of illegal aliens, who didn't enter the US to break the law but to work. Moreover, the Mexican-Americans have intermixed better with the Native American culture and they are culturally more akin to Americans in general. So which is it going to be, give the Mexicans amnesty to stay and work or deport them and build a wall to keep them out? Which is the Conservative and which is the Liberal stance?......................"
  • wasblind

    I'm a Conservative liberal

  • BurnTheShips

    The left/right classification system is retarded.

    I am mostly libertarian, which puts me on the left on some issues, and on the right on others.

    Libertarians are generally: OK with gay marriage, anti Iraq/Afghan war, anti drug war. etc.

    That's considered "left-liberal"

    Libertarians are generally: pro fiscal responsibility. Pro small government. pro low taxes. pro 2nd amendment. etc.

    That's considered "right-conservative."

    It's our stupid national discussion that tells people they have to be either "C" or "L" and cubbyholes everyone that way.


  • blondie

    I hated labels and pigeon holing people when in the WTS; I hate it even more now.

  • zoiks

    I really don't like how polarized the two sides are at this point in time. I don't agree with much of the more extreme rhetoric of either Liberals or Conservatives. And I am scared shitless at the far-far-right religious views. I like the idea of individual liberty being more important than government, but these far-far-right religious zealots in politics would say, "Individual liberty for all - except for the gays, and the...whatever we think is sinful." For me as an XJW, that's like jumping from one nightmare theocracy into another. Ugh.

    Also, what's with people automatically aligning themselves with one side or another side? What's wrong with thinking for oneself and acting (and voting) accordingly, with no commitment to a political party?

    Just wondering. I'm new at this.

Share this